"Inestimable Privilege. In an extraordinary decision, Judge Camarata denied the Burkes' right to the child because of their lack of belief in a Supreme Being. Despite the Burkes' "high moral and ethical standards," he said, the New Jersey state constitution declares that "no person shall be deprived of the inestimable privilege of worshiping Almighty God in a manner agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience." Despite Eleanor Katherine's tender years, he continued, "the child should have the freedom to worship as she sees fit, and not be influenced by prospective parents who do not believe in a Supreme Being."

Discuss . I think this is ridiculous

Sun Aug 23, 2009 8:21 am

mancabbage

Joined: 29 Jun 2005
Posts: 9273
Location: london

judge should loose their job.

Sun Aug 23, 2009 8:26 am

CriticalTheory_Breakfast

Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Posts: 1412
Location: NYC/Rochester

no fucking way. there has to be more to this story.

the fear of denying the baby the right to "worship whoever she/he wants" based on having parents who are non-believers is a flimsy argument, with the obvious contradictions. Anyone can see why this decision doesn't make sense. There is no way in hell that those people are going to lose their kid.

Sun Aug 23, 2009 8:30 am

mizterie

Joined: 12 Mar 2004
Posts: 4598
Location: the ether

"The Law: Can Atheists Be Parents?
Monday, Dec. 07, 1970"

"Last year the Burkes presented their adopted son, David, now 31, with a baby sister, Eleanor Katherine, now 17 months, whom they acquired from the same East Orange agency."

????

Sun Aug 23, 2009 8:37 am

Captiv8

Joined: 25 Aug 2006
Posts: 8546
Location: Third Coast

What kind of distorted parallel universe logic is this judge employing? Sounds like he more or less made an edict against atheism.

Sun Aug 23, 2009 9:30 am

T-Wrexp00ny tang

Joined: 30 Jun 2002
Posts: 6410
Location: Detroit, Michigan

mizterie wrote: Monday, Dec. 07, 1970

We've come a long way... like those slim ass cigarettes from Virginia.

Sun Aug 23, 2009 12:05 pm

Coffee Black

Joined: 16 Aug 2008
Posts: 331

Maybe I fooked that up? It just popped up on an rss feed today though....strange.

Sun Aug 23, 2009 1:17 pm

Szechwan

Joined: 19 Mar 2007
Posts: 587
Location: Vancouver Island

That is some bullshit. Very transparent.

Sun Aug 23, 2009 1:19 pm

futuristxen

Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 19377
Location: Tighten Your Bible Belt

T-Wrex wrote:

mizterie wrote: Monday, Dec. 07, 1970

We've come a long way... like those slim ass cigarettes from Virginia.

haha. YES

Sun Aug 23, 2009 1:33 pm

T-Wrexp00ny tang

Joined: 30 Jun 2002
Posts: 6410
Location: Detroit, Michigan

But there's still a ways to go.

LGBT adoption is still against the law in 6 states... including Michigan.

Sun Aug 23, 2009 1:58 pm

PatrickBateman

Joined: 09 Aug 2003
Posts: 2278
Location: Philadelphia, PA

T-Wrex wrote: But there's still a ways to go.

LGBT adoption is still against the law in 6 states... including Michigan.

Really? only six?

So if your gay, you can adopt a kid in a lot more places then you can get married?